Related
This might sound crazy but what if we can eventually hack the Chromecast to cast the actual phone/tablet screen (such as you can currently with the desktop of a computer) and play Android games on an HDTV. Yes, we can just get the Ouya but this would be awesome. Now I have no idea if hacking something like this will make it possible, but this would be pretty cool down the road.
Edit: Something like this actually would be perfect. Had no idea this existed:
Miracast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYx9YNoD014
tanw42 said:
This might sound crazy but what if we can eventually hack the Chromecast to cast the actual phone/tablet screen (such as you can currently with the desktop of a computer) and play Android games on an HDTV. Yes, we can just get the Ouya but this would be awesome. Now I have no idea if hacking something like this will make it possible, but this would be pretty cool down the road.
Edit: Something like this actually would be perfect. Had no idea this existed:
Miracast:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYx9YNoD014
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that the accessibility of this device and it's price are 2 things what will greatly help the community develop on this. Just like Samsung's All-Share Dongle, i do think it's only a matter of time before we can mirror our screen
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
larryvand said:
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the most likely avenue for this would be to write an app that turns the phone (or laptop) into a "local cloud" that is streaming just like Netflix or Play Music. It would obviously take some development but I don't think it's too outlandish.
The problem with screen mirroring is lag. From what I have seen 250ms lag is the norm with Miracast. There is just no way around it with current tech. I think that is part of the reason for chromecast. It partially eliminates the need for screen mirroring. Chromecast gives the same ability of using your phone/tablet to browse and select content as does Miracast, but you get a full-screen experience with the best possible resolution depending on internet bandwidth. It is also not depending on your device to be the streamer as is the case with Miracast.
I expect to see another Google TV type device with the new Jellybean update and Chromecast that will be more geared towards gaming on the big screen. I predict we will see it in Q4 or Q1 of next year.
Lag might be there on some level, but it definitely doesnt have any impact the probability of chromecast and screen mirroring. Its not about how well it does it, it's about if i can. Its a 35$ gadget, lets not overthink this. If it's at all possible, 250ms lag would still be more than acceptable. Of course, thins would never be a gaming device where real time information in crucial
larryvand said:
I don't think you will be able to play local games from your table or phone in the near future for the simple reason that everything is being streamed from the cloud. Even Chromecasting the current tab or the full desktop, what happens is google sends your full desktop or tab to their cloud and then streams it back up. That adds the 1 second delay between what you see on your screen and what appears on your TV. Trying to play a real time game with a 1 sec delay will be nearly impossible. Maybe in the future when everyone will have a fiberoptic connections, if they can cut that delay down to 10ms, then I would say yes/maybe. But that much fast bandwidth is still out in the future.
The thing though about Chromecast is that Google has the right idea on where things are headed. This is by far the best innovation out there for your TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I'm unsure of how it exactly works, I don't think everything is necessarily streamed through the cloud. Using your phone or tablet to play netflix or youtube videos from the cloud - yes...
...but I was able to stream a local mkv video in a chrome tab on my desktop to the chromecast. I doubt it makes the round trip through google since I know my upload speeds are pretty bad. My guess is that google just executes the handshake and the video streams through your intranet directly.
pjsnyc said:
While I'm unsure of how it exactly works, I don't think everything is necessarily streamed through the cloud. Using your phone or tablet to play netflix or youtube videos from the cloud - yes...
...but I was able to stream a local mkv video in a chrome tab on my desktop to the chromecast. I doubt it makes the round trip through google since I know my upload speeds are pretty bad. My guess is that google just executes the handshake and the video streams through your intranet directly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are correct about chrome tab mirroring. It goes straight over your local network, but the native codec support of the current Chromecast device is lacking which may be improved by savvy developers found right here. However, since tab mirroring only works from PCs, I think it is a step backwards.
007shark said:
You are correct about chrome tab mirroring. It goes straight over your local network, but the native codec support of the current Chromecast device is lacking which may be improved by savvy developers found right here. However, since tab mirroring only works from PCs, I think it is a step backwards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My understanding is that if you have the correct codecs installed on your desktop/laptop with chrome, you should theoretically be able to play any file type. I saw a video of it working with plex or simply navigating your local drives with chrome. Whether or not native codec support is lacking on the chromecast is moot imho. Tab mirroring on a phone or tablet should eventually come, I just think the devices need more horsepower so to speak.
polish_pat said:
Lag might be there on some level, but it definitely doesnt have any impact the probability of chromecast and screen mirroring. Its not about how well it does it, it's about if i can. Its a 35$ gadget, lets not overthink this. If it's at all possible, 250ms lag would still be more than acceptable. Of course, thins would never be a gaming device where real time information in crucial
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am with you. I think this little device will be one of the more popular developer projects on xda.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------
pjsnyc said:
My understanding is that if you have the correct codecs installed on your desktop/laptop with chrome, you should theoretically be able to play any file type. I saw a video of it working with plex or simply navigating your local drives with chrome. Whether or not native codec support is lacking on the chromecast is moot imho. Tab mirroring on a phone or tablet should eventually come, I just think the devices need more horsepower so to speak.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay, so it is transcoding on the fly. I agree with you on not yet on the phones because of lack of processing power. Miracast is still the better option with portable devices even with the minor lag.
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
007shark said:
...
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
pjsnyc said:
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like the DLNA for getting photos, videos, and music from my device to the TV. Samsung's AllCast from their phones/tablets work great this way even with non-Samsung DLNA devices. If Google implemented DLNA with Chromecast then a phone/tablet's native gallery and video apps could seamlessly work as the Netflix and YouTube apps do without a normal consumer understanding how it works. And also without having to sync everything to the cloud.
007shark said:
I like the DLNA for getting photos, videos, and music from my device to the TV. Samsung's AllCast from their phones/tablets work great this way even with non-Samsung DLNA devices. If Google implemented DLNA with Chromecast then a phone/tablet's native gallery and video apps could seamlessly work as the Netflix and YouTube apps do without a normal consumer understanding how it works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess this is where you and I disagree. The 'understanding how it works' part. For example - once you get chromecast set up with your laptop on your couch, sharing photos and videos with other people in your livingroom from facebook is easy to understand for anyone. 'Native' for the masses is what is currently showing in the browser tab.
pjsnyc said:
I guess this is where you and I disagree. The 'understanding how it works' part. For example - once you get chromecast set up with your laptop on your couch, sharing photos and videos with other people in your livingroom from facebook is easy to understand for anyone. 'Native' for the masses is what is currently showing in the browser tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is exactly the difference. I don't use a laptop in my living room. I use my tablet and/or phone. I think that is also the growing trend at least from my circle of friends and family.
EDIT: I use to watch TV with a laptop in my lap, but haven't done that in a couple years since I got a tablet.
For games we could see some games go to cloud based solution. This could work by your phone/controller sending information to the server that in turn sends back appropriate results to the Chromecast. So games aren't played on the phone but on the server the phone just sends commands.
Yeah miracast is sick
Sent from my SPH-L720 using xda premium
pjsnyc said:
I kinda like it the way it is. While DLNA has been around for a while, I honestly havent seen a simple implementation of it yet (unless you lock yourself into one brand/ecosystem). I am excited that the hacking community is already tearing this thing apart, but the simplicity of setting it up and just getting it to work for the masses is ridiculous at this price.
I lucked out in getting mine - my coworker was able to arrange a pickup at bestbuy and sold it to me at price when he realized he couldn't mirror a mobile chrome tab.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://elinux.org/DLNA_Open_Source_Projects ?
007shark said:
I am with you. I think this little device will be one of the more popular developer projects on xda.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------
Okay, so it is transcoding on the fly. I agree with you on not yet on the phones because of lack of processing power. Miracast is still the better option with portable devices even with the minor lag.
I guess I am dreaming for, because Google surprised me with this gadget and I was unable to get one before they were all sold out, an all encompassing gadget that has DLNA, Miracast, and Chromecast in the same form factor. I think the DLNA might be able to be added to this. I doubt Miracast would be able to, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't see any hardware limitations for Mircacast at this moment, still digging through the tech specs and kernel though
Once the Google Chromecast SDK is released, is this rootable serial number and post 12840 bootloader being unrootable going to be an issue?
Here is what I think it will be.
Google has to watch their ass around these archaic studios, these studios want to own everything.
The SDK will be somewhat limited to protect the business interests at Google with Satan (I mean SONY/Hollywood et al)
If you think that Google is going to open it up to watch any video pirated or not, you are delusional. HDMI is basically owned by these studios and they can step in a company like Google and destroy it. Just like Google TV.
Google probably doesn't want another diabocle like Google TV and want some sort of success with televisions so they are going to listen to the developers but always listen to the wallet first.
Chromecast wasn't meant for the tinkering demographic.
Sent from my XT926 using Tapatalk
abuttino said:
The SDK will be somewhat limited to protect the business interests at Google with Satan (I mean SONY/Hollywood et al)
If you think that Google is going to open it up to watch any video pirated or not, you are delusional. HDMI is basically owned by these studios and they can step in a company like Google and destroy it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's a tinfoil hat post if I've ever seen one. We already know Plex has developers working with Google to build casting into their app. Why would Google invite them to do that, knowing that function of their app is to playback any format of locally stored media?
fudsak said:
Well that's a tinfoil hat post if I've ever seen one. We already know Plex has developers working with Google to build casting into their app. Why would Google invite them to do that, knowing that function of their app is to playback any format of locally stored media?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ha, that was a great first line!! :good: Not to throw out the A word but dosent appletv and an iPhone do all the things we want chromecast to do? Stream right from the phone. Local videos? all that good stuff...
If that's true, we might see it come to chromecast. The question is, does chromecast have a powerful enough CPU to do that?
Sent from my XT926 using Tapatalk
cdrshm said:
Ha, that was a great first line!! :good: Not to throw out the A word but dosent appletv and an iPhone do all the things we want chromecast to do? Stream right from the phone. Local videos? all that good stuff...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chromecast works differently from (at least how I understand it) how AirPlay on AppleTV + iPhone work...
According to my understanding (and HowStuffWorks), AirPlay actually streams from the iPhone or other AirPlay source. The iPhone or other AirPlay source has to be on the same network, powered up and have the content, or be able to get the content.
In the Chromecast world, this is equivalent to how Chrome tab casting from a computer and AllCast/AirCast/KoushCast with rooted a Chromecast work, but those two are more exceptions than the rule.
Chromecast's native behavior, on the other hand, simply accepts a request "hand-off" and goes to retrieve the content itself.
There's a subtle but significant difference there. In the Chromecast model, once the cast request is made, the requesting device (phone, tablet) is no longer necessary for playback (of course, you can't control playback). The phone/tablet/computer can be disconnected from the network or powered off, and the Chromecast will continue to play like nothing happened.
The requesting device simply controls the playback from there. It's much like how you use your remote control to change channels on your TV. Once the TV changes to the selected channel, you see what's on and you don't need the remote unless you want to change channels or adjust the volume.
This also allows playback to controlled from a different device, at least for most applications. That's pretty cool for me, as I might start something for the family to watch, then leave for work and my wife can just take over control, just like passing the remote.
---------- Post added at 08:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:37 AM ----------
abuttino said:
If that's true, we might see it come to chromecast. The question is, does chromecast have a powerful enough CPU to do that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chromecast would just be a Plex client like any other mobile device so Chromecast's CPU would only be involved in decoding the video stream from the Plex server.
The Plex server would be responsible for and burdened with any necessary transcoding duties.
^ Exactly.
Hey im new to this chromecast. I can see my chrome browser on the pc but not on android, how can I do that? Sijce here are very experienced users oj chromecast can someone describe the full working potentials this device has?
Sent from my GT-N8013 using xda app-developers app
You cant do squat with Chrome on Android yet for some odd reason.
Tab casting from Chrome uses the host CPU to re-encode the video and stream it to the Chromecast on-the-fly. Tablet and phone CPUs don't have enough processing power. That's why there's no Chromecast extension for Chrome on your portable device.
Well that sucks bc there is possibilities with this chromecast. I downloaded the allcast and obviously updated my google services. I cast a picture and it doesnt show normal, shows rotated to the left. Can you cast from the gallery vids and photos?
Sent from my GT-N8013 using xda app-developers app
The man problem is the fact that Android Chrome does not support Chrome Apps and Extensions.
Something I'm told Google is working on...
Asphyx said:
The man problem is the fact that Android Chrome does not support Chrome Apps and Extensions.
Something I'm told Google is working on...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea they better be working on it, this has been out couple months now they need to update more
Sent from my GT-N8013 using xda app-developers app
Google is working on a way to mirror your android screen to the chromecast and we know this because on kitkat roms theres an option to cast screen but isn't quite working yet. Its only been coded in but thats it.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
tooblackforjack said:
Google is working on a way to mirror your android screen to the chromecast and we know this because on kitkat roms theres an option to cast screen but isn't quite working yet. Its only been coded in but thats it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
KitKat roms have Miracast, a different protocol.
Supported by HTC and Samsung since 2012 with their private dongles.
Not new, sorry.
EarlyMon said:
KitKat roms have Miracast, a different protocol.
Supported by HTC and Samsung since 2012 with their private dongles.
Not new, sorry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah ik, i was just informing in case he didn't know sorry.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
EarlyMon said:
KitKat roms have Miracast, a different protocol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but Google has renamed it to Cast Screen. Clearly, they will be adding support for casting to Chromecasts directly inside of Android. Otherwise, renaming it to match the Chromecast nomenclature makes no sense.
bozzykid said:
Yes, but Google has renamed it to Cast Screen. Clearly, they will be adding support for casting to Chromecasts directly inside of Android. Otherwise, renaming it to match the Chromecast nomenclature makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because MiraCAST isn't confusing enough?
I'm aware that a number of blogs not familiar with Miracast are spreading that rumor. I think it's wishful thinking but we'll see, won't we?
http://www.howtogeek.com/177145/wir...ed-airplay-miracast-widi-chromecast-and-dlna/
http://readwrite.com/2013/11/07/android-kitkat-developers-users
A side note, Android 4.4 KitKat devices can now be certified by the Wi-Fi alliance as being Miracast compatible. That is a big step for Android in being able to stream content from a device to a television by supporting more streaming standards. Now only if the Chromecast supported Miracast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidpolice.com/tags/miracast/
So, you believe that WiFi Direct is coming to the existing Chromecast?
Or that in addition to Miracast, they'll be providing a second protocol for phones, with a server (like Koush did)? And people will be able to figure out the two casting options on their devices?
I think that it's far more likely that rather than put both protocols on a phone or into the existing Chromecast, it's more likely that DIAL support plus Miracast *might* appear in a Chromecast 2.
Miracast dongles already exist, it's February and the SDK libraries still aren't out, and in July, Chromecast will be a year old.
Apple TV costs $100 with this feature, a Belkin Miracast dongle is $80, an HTC Media Link HD is $100, the Samsung Allshare Cast Hub was a hundred, is $65 on Amazon now.
It's possible that Google is going to pump this in to the existing Chromecast for the faithful for free, but I'm just not feeling it.
Either way, so far KitKat includes Miracast, not DIAL.
EarlyMon said:
Or that in addition to Miracast, they'll be providing a second protocol for phones, with a server (like Koush did)? And people will be able to figure out the two casting options on their devices?
I think that it's far more likely that rather than put both protocols on a phone or into the existing Chromecast, it's more likely that DIAL support plus Miracast *might* appear in a Chromecast 2.
...
It's possible that Google is going to pump this in to the existing Chromecast for the faithful for free, but I'm just not feeling it.
Either way, so far KitKat includes Miracast, not DIAL.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First part:
Since it's (Android) device mirroring functions appear to be in the SDK, but are limited only to OEM developers, my best-guess is that what we'll see is any Chromecast device mirroring will have to be "cooked" into a ROM rather than a loose bit (makes sense - that's how Samsung's AllShare Cast works too).
Hopefully the UX engineers win and make it so the Screen Mirroring option at least combines Google Cast and Miracast device options together, rather than having separate options for Screen Mirroring (Miracast) and Screen Mirroring (Google Cast).
Second part:
Yeah, not going to hold my breath. As I keep saying, screen mirroring is not the core competency of Chromecast.
bhiga said:
First part:
Since it's (Android) device mirroring functions appear to be in the SDK, but are limited only to OEM developers, my best-guess is that what we'll see is any Chromecast device mirroring will have to be "cooked" into a ROM rather than a loose bit (makes sense - that's how Samsung's AllShare Cast works too).
Hopefully the UX engineers win and make it so the Screen Mirroring option at least combines Google Cast and Miracast device options together, rather than having separate options for Screen Mirroring (Miracast) and Screen Mirroring (Google Cast).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both together sounds like a bit much, but it's possible.
Samsung is likely going their own way.
http://www.slashgear.com/samsung-an...ultiscreen-and-overlay-capabilities-28303309/
Second part:
Yeah, not going to hold my breath. As I keep saying, screen mirroring is not the core competency of Chromecast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree.
If you ask me any attempt to make CCast work like a Miracast would be a big waste, Even a downgrade!
No need for Direct Connection for Mirroring as Mirror over IP is far more flexible and less problematical. Not to mention requires no special software support like Miracast does. If they really wanted Miracast type direct mirroring all it would take is some additions to the rom cause hardware wise, the CCast has everything it needs
It may not be part of why the CCast was developed but I don't see Google being as smart as they are leaving that market open to Miracast dongles when they know full well the only thing inhibiting CCast from doing it (and better) is their lack of developing an App that does it for Mobile...
As for the Casting support in the SDK for OEM use I suspect that is more generic in nature and just an exposure of the display system to support Miracast, Perhaps CCast Mirroring and any other 2nd screen tech that comes down the pipe.
I think mirroring feature is a bit overrated myself, it's good for an audience but not for an operator's use.
It's easier to do than what CCast is trying to do because there is no need for a control protocol...Just a simple transcoder for Video and Audio the rest is all done on the Master Display device.
As for that Samsung option I don't expect it to take off due to proprietary concerns. It's meant for Samsung SmartTVs and I bet LG and Sony won't support it. Samsung would be better off building that capability directly into the TV itself.
DIAL is still in its infancy and I expect the protocol to expand as support and adoption of it grows...
Whatever lessons they learned from Chromecast I expect to be addressed whenever they get around to making the second gen CCast.
Wired Networking or at minimum 5Ghz Wireless support is to be expected as would a more robust Video playback Compatibility.
It's not likely that any app that adds CCast support is going to remove it in the future which means as the Apps list grows so too does the chance we have of seeing this supported without the need for a dongle at all.
TV over the Web will work the way it was supposed to and remove the biggest hurdle to achieving full IPTV to date...
The Navigation and Channel Guide no one could figure out how to do....
And who knew the Web Browser was the answer all along.
Samsung is still the largest supplier of flat screen TVs in North America, is it not?
Besides, they've never been shy about adding interfaces to support the future. I have a Samsung TV with a specialized iPod interface as proof. (And I believe that the article did say clearly that Samsung was going to build the new casting into their TVs.)
And none of the TV makers think twice about adding fragmenting features, and Samsung certainly doesn't for their mobile devices.
As for the claim that it's just about making a mobile app and declaring victory for screen casting, you might want to review the API changes that have been evolving for months.
Doing that without library support and not differentiating DRM vs non-DRM cast calls may seem simple to you but it doesn't to me.
Last published, Netflix and YouTube accounted for over 50% of North American broadband traffic.
Screen casting may be an emerging market, or it could just be a flash in the pan.
EarlyMon said:
Samsung is still the largest supplier of flat screen TVs in North America, is it not?
Besides, they've never been shy about adding interfaces to support the future. I have a Samsung TV with a specialized iPod interface as proof. (And I believe that the article did say clearly that Samsung was going to build the new casting into their TVs.)
And none of the TV makers think twice about adding fragmenting features, and Samsung certainly doesn't for their mobile devices.
As for the claim that it's just about making a mobile app and declaring victory for screen casting, you might want to review the API changes that have been evolving for months.
Doing that without library support and not differentiating DRM vs non-DRM cast calls may seem simple to you but it doesn't to me.
Last published, Netflix and YouTube accounted for over 50% of North American broadband traffic.
Screen casting may be an emerging market, or it could just be a flash in the pan.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I guess Samsung is the largest supplier of Flat Screens in NA just like Apple is the biggest supplier of Smart Phones in NA...
Until you realize combine all the NOT Samsung Models into an US vs THEM and they are not the Majority by any means...Same with Apple vs Android as opposed to Apple vs Samsung itself.
As for the DRM you forget that DIAL doesn't care and leaves using or not using up to the content provider. It's there if you want it and if not you only have to support the DIscover and Launch capabilities.
Is Sony (who owns a majority of content compared to Samsung) going to cut out DIAL for Samsung's proprietary system?
Doubtful!
And since the CCast and DIAL supports ANY TV with HDMI input it has a far better chance of being adopted as a standard than Samsung's device is.
IMO most of the current desire for screencasting is really a "backup plan" for content that is currently not supported via DIAL. "___ isn't supported so I want to mirror my screen/tab."
So the mainstream correct solution would be to get the desired content providers on-board with Google Cast.
That would leave non-"canned" content for screen mirroring (games in a second screen model, general browsing, presentations, Skype, etc).
I'd love to see a native Skype for Chromecast using the microphone and controls on my tablet/phone with video on the TV but keeping it in sync might be nontrivial engineering on the Skype end.
Asphyx said:
As for the DRM you forget that DIAL doesn't care and leaves using or not using up to the content provider. It's there if you want it and if not you only have to support the DIscover and Launch capabilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can only invite you, again, to look at the actual casting API rather than rely on assumptions.
It's NOT the same as that last July and it absolutely, positively does recognize casting DRM content.
Start here -
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/m/#!topic/apps-dev/emlKA4C-c90
And then Google for what's happened since, along with Koush's commentaries.
Is Sony (who owns a majority of content compared to Samsung) going to cut out DIAL for Samsung's proprietary system?
Doubtful!
And since the CCast and DIAL supports ANY TV with HDMI input it has a far better chance of being adopted as a standard than Samsung's device is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you even read the article to discover that Samsung is using a superset of DIAL and support by Sony, LG, and Panasonic TV sets is expected?
---------- Post added at 04:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:07 PM ----------
bhiga said:
IMO most of the current desire for screencasting is really a "backup plan" for content that is currently not supported via DIAL. "___ isn't supported so I want to mirror my screen/tab."
So the mainstream correct solution would be to get the desired content providers on-board with Google Cast.
That would leave non-"canned" content for screen mirroring (games in a second screen model, general browsing, presentations, Skype, etc).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you checked out what Vbukit is planning on supporting with Chromecast?
Pretty interesting, I think.
Not sure about getting Skype sorted out.
It seems like every time Skype updates, it's a step backwards, but that's just my off-topic opinion.
EarlyMon said:
Have you checked out what Vbukit is planning on supporting with Chromecast?
Pretty interesting, I think.
Not sure about getting Skype sorted out.
It seems like every time Skype updates, it's a step backwards, but that's just my off-topic opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, Vbukit is a little rough around the edges, but I can definitely see it being useful for presenters and educators especially.
Agree with you on Skype...
Back on-topic, there isn't a lot of technical copyright/DRM concern regarding casting anything you see on the screen - after all, if you can see it on the screen, you've seen it already. It's just that the legal types are not technical, highly likely to make crazy conclusions and assumptions, and get paid no matter what they do - so it's in their best interest to make issue of little things. I've personally seen warnings from the copyright hunters complete with ISP traces down to the router endpoint too, so they are watching and waiting to pounce.
I still hope an optimized device mirroring comes as something deeper within the Android OS itself.
Something akin to RemoteX in the Windows space, which is a "remote render" or offload of the graphic drawing functions. Anything that's not reliant upon a local bitmap could be rendered on Chromecast, rather than sent as large/inefficient bitmap data or CPU-intensive compressed data. That would make some "twitchy" games playable, especially if Chromecast has enough memory/storage to cache bitmaps that it does end up needing. Full-screen video, of course, doesn't benefit, nor does typical FPS games since the entirety of the screen is being updated with bitmaps.
For fun, I played a video on my phone and watched it on my computer (no audio) via TeamViewer. It took me back to the early 90's.
We've waited for apps and other optimized content this long, let's see what Google delivers.
Content providers have been successfully inhibiting HDMI and MHL output from their apps running on Android devices.
I believe that the casting API changes may have them in mind, but that's pure conjecture on my part.
I think it's ridiculous but so long as people check the boxes and agree to the terms of service, they're free to enforce it.
Hi,
Just looking into rooting my Chromecast I have read some threads but wanted to know can you use a firmware that lets you use the CC like a Android TV box or even with a different firmware can you just cast from a phone/tablet?
Thanks,
Fayraz
short answer....NO!
Doesn't work like that!
There's now a real Chromecast clone from Amazon, does that contain the necessary vulnerabilities to root, install local apps etc?
And stream from YouTube, that's the only service I use of those for which the CC is intended officially.
Can't say anything about the Amazon CCast clone since I don't know much about it...
But what you are looking for s more like the Amazon Fire, and Roku type system.
CCast saves no apps on the unit, they are all loaded from the Internet.
What you really should look at is one of those Android's on a stick that can pretty much run any android app plus have some of the target features of a CCast with software that supports it such as Plex.
There may also be software out there that makes any android device targetable in the same way a CCast is...
Hello everybody.
For some time now I have the new Chromecast with Google TV and I would like to share my feelings on certain aspects that disappointed me and which scare me for the future of Android TV.
Android TV has always been a more closed system than Android but I have the impression with this new device that it is even more the case and that Google is trying to lock its system even more.
On the new device, if you want to install applications that are not on the play store, you must activate the options for developers, then start again several times to install these applications (it does not necessarily work the first time ).
I also noticed that a lot of Android apps didn't do image rotation or stretching and displayed vertically like a smartphone but with parts of the image cut off. Some Android apps are therefore not even usable now on the new Chromecast. I searched this new Chromecast for a setting that would help me display its Android apps properly but couldn't find anything.
Is there a setting to properly display its applications there? Are these only corrections that will be made in the next updates or is it, as I think, a desire by Google to limit Android TV more and more to Android TV applications?
Thank you for your many responses.
The orientation issue may have something to do with how the Android TV device is identifying itself. That could get fixed in a new release. Haven't dug in enough to know that yet. I haven't had any trouble installing stuff via side loading.
As for being locked down, Android TV certified devices are way more locked down than AOSP or even phones. I wish they'd put the Android TV portions (or even just the casting stack) into AOSP, but that ship has long sailed.
Averix said:
The orientation issue may have something to do with how the Android TV device is identifying itself. That could get fixed in a new release. Haven't dug in enough to know that yet. I haven't had any trouble installing stuff via side loading.
As for being locked down, Android TV certified devices are way more locked down than AOSP or even phones. I wish they'd put the Android TV portions (or even just the casting stack) into AOSP, but that ship has long sailed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok so you had no problem with Android applications. I may have had no luck with apps that started badly. Perhaps it is not Google's desire to prevent or complicate the use of applications that are not from the Android TV Play Store.
We will see if other users have this problem.
I too would have loved to have the cast on Android box.
Do you know of an application that allows you to rotate the image like you can find in the Ugoos box system?
From what I can tell, it is just as open** as my Nvidia Shield. Installing sideloaded apps is just as simple. Apps that do not have manual rotation options can be tricky, or those coded to be used in portrait mode only. Other than that, sideloading works identically. PS, you still need something like Sideload Launcher to launch these sideloaded apps.
Android TV/Google TV has always been very limited when it comes to customizability. Probably has a lot to do with the fact that Google assumed, and rightly so that, most consumers just want to plug it in and watch stuff, not mess around with it. Do I agree with that? No, I love making devices do things they weren't designed to, but even I have no reason or motivation to root these devices.
** = Equally as locked down.
Have you tried using a sceen rotation app? I use to use a modded spectrum tv app on fire tv and to fix rotation issue you had to use a screen rotation app.
jkbee26 said:
Android TV has always been a more closed system than Android but I have the impression with this new device that it is even more the case and that Google is trying to lock its system even more.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I feel your pain.
That's Google 2020 for you, get ready for Google 2021 and 2022
I am thinking of replacing a fire tv stick 4k with the new Chromecast, hoping to gain bitstreaming audio from 3d party apps. It won't work for me on the amazon device.
I want to continue using wolf launcher and some sideloaded apps, which are not all available on the play store.
How much of free storage is available on the Cromecast?
Hey folks
I bought a Chromecast with Google TV and I am experiencing this same issue. I am trying to use an app which I know it wasn't developed for this device, but I know it works because have it installed on an Android TV. The difference is that on Google TV it opens as portrait and sits in the middle of the screen, where in the Android TV it expands and takes the whole screen. Same thing happens, for example, with Instagram. I've tried a dozen of apps that supposedly force the orientation, but it never worked.
Is there anything that can be done or am I am chasing ghosts?
(p.s. is it worth to post this as a new thread?)